On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 12:02:40AM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > Hello Michael, > > On 08/20/2015 10:09 PM, Michael Welling wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 09:07:26AM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > >> The driver has an OF id table but the .of_match_table is not set so > >> the SPI core can't do an OF style match and the table was unused. > >> > > > > Is an OF style match necessary? > > > > Did you read the cover letter [0] on which I explain why is needed to > avoid breaking module autoloading in the future? Once the SPI core is > changed by RFC patch 18/18? (you were cc'ed in the cover letter BTW). Well I have read it now. :) > > > I have been using devicetree and it matches based on the .id_table. > > > > Yes it fallbacks to the .id_table or the driver name but the correct > thing to do for devices registered by OF, is to match using the > compatible string. > > > Couldn't we just remove the mcp320x_dt_ids table instead? > > > > No, that is the wrong thing to do IMHO since the compatible string > contains both vendor and device name whle the .id_table only contains > a device name. > > So it makes sense to match using the compatible string and also report > the OF modalias information to user-space. > > Otherwise what's the point of the vendor in the compatible string for > SPI devices? You can just use "bar" instead of "foo,bar" as a string. > Well then shouldn't the patch include adding the vendor to the compatible string? > [0]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/8/20/109 > > Best regards, > -- > Javier Martinez Canillas > Open Source Group > Samsung Research America -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
